Axe Vs. Knife

[Jens Schuetz]

If the weights are the same (not the necessarily the lengths) the axe should win on anything 6" or larger if a person knows how to use an axe. I'm not sure why it's a point about the need to be more precise with an axe. It's assumed that any comparitive testing would be by a competent person, otherwise what is the point of testing the equipment? I like and use both, but a 2.5# axe on a 14"-19" handle will outchop a 2.5# knife of any length or style when both are competently used on a tree of 6" or larger.

In carrying either a long knife or an axe to me it would not preclude a carrying a pocketknife. When my britches go on in the morning a pocket knife is always there. That knife would perform many other tasks that are most suitable for it whether carrying a long knife or an axe. The only advantage I can see for a long knife is to clear brush or smaller whippy saplings. For processing wood, the belt axe is preferred.

My comments are relative to typical north American forests. The contemporary trappers and woodsman of today still use pocket knives and small axes as their main forest gear. Go on any hunting or backpacking trip with a local guide into a wilderness area and I'm quite sure you'll see more combos of pocket knives and belt axes then pocket knives and machetes/Kukris.

The point of accuracy is important for this discussion. I doubt the average Joe like me would qualify as competent. We try the best we can but are still just city folks after all and no trappers and woodsmen. Even if I'd be competent, the eyes could get tired or burn from sweat and if I'm hungry and blood sugar low then stuff is generally a bit shaky and if I really need a fire I bet my hands might be cold too. Good for my health, the tool and chopping, if I have a longer edge and less chances to over or under strike in such a state.

True under ideal circumstances with the ideal person an axe will always win (unless you know of a knife with similar length, weight and weight distribution) Since nobody would disagree with this, there would be no point dicussing these scenarios. Therefor it's more interesting to see under what circumstances a knife could have the upper hand and to see if that applies to a user or not.

Also, I got excellent result with saws.

 

[Old Axeman]

If I do forget my britches (which could happen any day now at my age) I will at least have my pocket knife in my hand when I walk out the door.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

The answer is simple. What will chop better, a tool with a weight distribution which makes its momentum weaker, with worst cutting geometry and more prone to lose energy by vibration or the tool with better leverage and momentum, with the geometry optimized to cut the given material and better energy transference?

Do you have a good chopper?

 

[gsx-rboy750]

Didn't seem fair to not have axe chopping pictures so heres a 4-5" party seassoned pear branch from today. My way of relaxing after a longgggggg week at work.

After 3 swings

After 7

Thing is cutting with a chopper or a axe on a solid fixed surface is pretty easy. Chopping a standing tree that can move alittle makes the mass of the axe less useful. The thinner blade of a chopper will bit easier and produce a longer straight cut even if not as deep which wont nessessaryly be the case.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

If the weights are the same (not the necessarily the lengths) the axe should win on anything 6" or larger if a person knows how to use an axe. I'm not sure why it's a point about the need to be more precise with an axe. It's assumed that any comparitive testing would be by a competent person, otherwise what is the point of testing the equipment? I like and use both, but a 2.5# axe on a 14"-19" handle will outchop a 2.5# knife of any length or style when both are competently used on a tree of 6" or larger.

In carrying either a long knife or an axe to me it would not preclude a carrying a pocketknife. When my britches go on in the morning a pocket knife is always there. That knife would perform many other tasks that are most suitable for it whether carrying a long knife or an axe. The only advantage I can see for a long knife is to clear brush or smaller whippy saplings. For processing wood, the belt axe is preferred.

My comments are relative to typical north American forests. The contemporary trappers and woodsman of today still use pocket knives and small axes as their main forest gear. Go on any hunting or backpacking trip with a local guide into a wilderness area and I'm quite sure you'll see more combos of pocket knives and belt axes then pocket knives and machetes/Kukris.

The crappy soft steels of yesteryear wont not support the thin edges of choppers today. Part of the axes girth was also to prevent chipping everytime it hit the ground. I would say the adverage tree cut down 100years ago is 2-4times the diameter of todays

 

[300Six]

The crappy soft steels of yesteryear wont not support the thin edges of choppers today.

I don't know where you heard or read this but the majority of experienced axe users will cheerfully dispute this. The heyday of unbeatable quality axes pretty much died with the emergence of the chain saw 50-60 years ago.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

I don't know where you heard or read this but the majority of experienced axe users will cheerfully dispute this. The heyday of unbeatable quality axes pretty much died with the emergence of the chain saw 50-60 years ago.

I dont know what you are cheerfullly disputing but chain saws were around long before 50-60 years ago. And yes the softer steels of yesteryear would not support the thin edges of todays high preformance choppers. People used axes to knotch out sections of large trees so they can keep sawing and avoid binding weather it be chain or hand driven. On large old growth trees. People regardless of axe or saw no longer usually cut down old growth trees nowadays.

 

[Hacked]

Thing is cutting with a chopper or a axe on a solid fixed surface is pretty easy. Chopping a standing tree that can move alittle makes the mass of the axe less useful. The thinner blade of a chopper will bit easier and produce a longer straight cut even if not as deep which wont nessessaryly be the case.

Nope, easier cutting standing live by a long shot, yes I've done it.

The crappy soft steels of yesteryear wont not support the thin edges of choppers today. Part of the axes girth was also to prevent chipping everytime it hit the ground. I would say the adverage tree cut down 100years ago is 2-4times the diameter of todays

Define thin, axes ment for chopping generally have a 12-20° bit or 6-10° per side in knife terms. This is dependant upon the intended use and local. Yes an old axe will hold an edge with those angles, many of us can attest to that. What steels are you referring to, do you have specific data regarding the steel Kelly, Plumb, Collins, Mann Edge Tool Co, AA&T and so on used in their axes? As compared to what? Most modern chopping tools are made of simple high carbon steel. An axe should not be allowed to hit the ground, as discussed previously an advantage of the double bit axe is the ability to leave one edge obtuse for jobs were this was a possibility.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

Nope, easier cutting standing live by a long shot, yes I've done it.



.

I am refering to a smaller flexable tree. Not some lumbering timber. As far as axe statics I dont really keep those. I can tell you most axes are soft enough to sharpen with a file. Meaning somewhat low RC. Like 40s low 50. Most modern high end choppers tend to be RC 55 and above which work with thin edges becuase they dont destort so easily.
I personally think a good chopper at roughly equal weigth will out cut a axe to a certain point. After that as I stated before the things that make a axe a axe will start to show benifet. I tend to think thin edges work better at smaller trees etc.

 

[Hacked]

I can tell you most axes are soft enough to sharpen with a file. Meaning somewhat low RC. Like 40s low 50. Most modern high end choppers tend to be RC 55 and above which work with thin edges becuase they dont destort so easily.

Don't know were 40 to 50 came from, most hardware store axes probably fit in that category but that's not what we are talking about. A file will still cut steel in the 55 and up range, and I personally have a couple of axes that files skate across. Keeping in mind not all axes are created equal, but still the statement about "steels of yesteryear" just isn't holding any water.

Don't get me wrong I like machetes as well, they will slice through smaller limbs and underbrush with ease and even do some lighter chopping. But I believe the original topic was regarding chopping 6 in live oak and 12" pine, not saplings.

 

[SC T100]

Thing is cutting with a chopper or a axe on a solid fixed surface is pretty easy. Chopping a standing tree that can move alittle makes the mass of the axe less useful. The thinner blade of a chopper will bit easier and produce a longer straight cut even if not as deep which wont nessessaryly be the case.

The crappy soft steels of yesteryear wont not support the thin edges of choppers today. Part of the axes girth was also to prevent chipping everytime it hit the ground. I would say the adverage tree cut down 100years ago is 2-4times the diameter of todays

I dont know what you are cheerfullly disputing but chain saws were around long before 50-60 years ago. And yes the softer steels of yesteryear would not support the thin edges of todays high preformance choppers. People used axes to knotch out sections of large trees so they can keep sawing and avoid binding weather it be chain or hand driven. On large old growth trees. People regardless of axe or saw no longer usually cut down old growth trees nowadays.

I am refering to a smaller flexable tree. Not some lumbering timber. As far as axe statics I dont really keep those. I can tell you most axes are soft enough to sharpen with a file. Meaning somewhat low RC. Like 40s low 50. Most modern high end choppers tend to be RC 55 and above which work with thin edges becuase they dont destort so easily.
I personally think a good chopper at roughly equal weigth will out cut a axe to a certain point. After that as I stated before the things that make a axe a axe will start to show benifet. I tend to think thin edges work better at smaller trees etc.

With all due respect, you seem to have gotten some bad information on a lot of what you've said here, and there's a lot to unpack. You wouldn't use an axe on small springy saplings...wrong tool for the job so that point is irrelevant. Unless you mean small hatchets or something? The axes girth isn't to protect the "soft" steel; it's for weight, popping chips, and tool life. Old axes have incredibly hard bits; some so much so files won't touch them. A chopper at 55 Rc can be filed; I'm not sure what you meant there. What super choppers are you referencing that are so hard you can't file them? Files are up around 64 Rc.

You also seem to be arguing that old axes are soft (incorrect) and were used for large timber (correct), but modern choppers are better because they have thin edges that are so good they can't be filed (incorrect), and outchop an axe of the same weight on small, springy stuff (correct, but again, that's not what an axe is for...wrong tool for the job). I don't follow your logic. You're saying a different tool meant for a different task is better than an axe at a job the axe isn't designed for, but with lots of odd assumptions. Am I missing something?

6" live oak is a whole other animal; there's a reason they made ships out of the stuff.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

I would say most axes modern or not have in general softer steel which would deform at the thinner edge geometries of "modern""higher end" choppers of simular weight. Both tools have different cutting charactisics that work better for different situations. As stated I think a axe can outcut a choppper in certain situtations but not in others. Before I started using "more modern higher end steel" choppers with thinner grinds I would not have found them as capable as I do now.
In general a axe can be filed easier or rather easy compared to some 3v or 01 or whatever of higher RC. Typically back in the day axes where used to assist saws cutting large trees.

 

[Square_peg]

Upper shelf vintage axes had better steel than anything made today. If by "modern higher end axes" you mean the current slate of Euro-imports then you should discover that those axes aren't worthy to sweep up after a good vintage axe. The Euros have inferior steel and vastly inferior geometry for all but light bushcraft work. They are very handy bushcraft axes.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

Upper shelf vintage axes had better steel than anything made today. If by "modern higher end axes" you mean the current slate of Euro-imports then you should discover that those axes aren't worthy to sweep up after a good vintage axe. The Euros have inferior steel and vastly inferior geometry for all but light bushcraft work. They are very handy bushcraft axes.

Put on the readers as I never wrote what you quoted me. I live in wi and am 50% french canadian. My grandpa was a logger, farmer and worked for the rail road I have been exposed to axes and the concepts of cutting wood. I have not studied law or debating I am simply stating truths I have seen.

 

[Old Axeman]

"I am simply stating truths I have seen" You ment to say-I am simply stating the truths as I see them, right? I was born in northern Wisconsin into a many generation logging family. I worked for 25 years felling timber and then worked another 30 years restoring historic buildings where I used an axe almost every day. I have worked , one way or another, in almost every state in the union. gsx-rboy750, after reading your posts here, you really fit the bill for-"Often Wrong, but Never in Doubt"

 

[Cobalt]

I think you disagree?

Yeah, I reread what he said. I have used both. And you are correct. My point was that As the weight of both goes up, the axe has several advantages. One is the higher concentrated weight well out in front. I think 2.1 to 2.4 lbs total weight is the breaking point. Once you start going over that weight the axe starts taking over by a big margin. One huge advantage is that you will swing an axe that heavy with both hands, where most blades you will swing with one hand. That alone increases the power of the stroke by 30-40%. But at 2lbs or less a good blade will easily keep up with a hatchet of the same weight. There is a mechanical reason for that.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

"I am simply stating truths I have seen" You ment to say-I am simply stating the truths as I see them, right? I was born in northern Wisconsin into a many generation logging family. I worked for 25 years felling timber and then worked another 30 years restoring historic buildings where I used an axe almost every day. I have worked , one way or another, in almost every state in the union. gsx-rboy750, after reading your posts here, you really fit the bill for-"Often Wrong, but Never in Doubt"

Unsure how I am often wrong but never i doubt as I stated there are situations where a axe will out cut a chopper and a chopper out cut a axe. But I explained why I thought that and the reasoning behind it. Ie thicker edges on most axes vs thinner on most choppers and the times I think those come into play.
In all your felling years did you do all your tree cutting with souly a axe?
Its like you are trying to call me a da but not saying why I am a da.
If you are still in wisconsin let meet up and have a chop off? I prefer testing theories in real life.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

Yeah, I reread what he said. I have used both. And you are correct. My point was that As the weight of both goes up, the axe has several advantages. One is the higher concentrated weight well out in front. I think 2.1 to 2.4 lbs total weight is the breaking point. Once you start going over that weight the axe starts taking over by a big margin. One huge advantage is that you will swing an axe that heavy with both hands, where most blades you will swing with one hand. That alone increases the power of the stroke by 30-40%. But at 2lbs or less a good blade will easily keep up with a hatchet of the same weight. There is a mechanical reason for that.

I was going to say he agrees with me becuse I stated a axe will be able to outcut a chopper in many cases.

 

[Cobalt]

I was going to say he agrees with me becuse I stated a axe will be able to outcut a chopper in many cases.

yes you did. I think it was your wording of the paragraph that made it confusing.

 

[gsx-rboy750]

yes you did. I think it was your wording of the paragraph that made it confusing.

I am a boiler operator/ building automation by day and hobbies fabricator by night. Nowhere am I stating to be a linguist or lawyer. Lol